Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the WESIP Change Orders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PUC outlines new quarterly reporting for WESIP change orders as some projects near 10% thresholds
Summary
PUC staff presented a quarterly change-order status report for the Water Enterprise System Improvement Program, explained categories of change orders and thresholds that trigger commission approval, and highlighted projects nearing the 10% change-order threshold.
PUC staff on Sept. 22 rolled out a quarterly change-order dashboard and described new quality-management steps intended to reduce design errors that drive change orders in the Water Enterprise System Improvement Program (WESIP).
What was presented: Harlan Kelly, Assistant General Manager, explained the spreadsheet columns — original contract, approved change orders, pending changes, revised contract total and percent complete — and defined three categories for changes: (1) unforeseen conditions discovered in the field, (2) owner-directed changes, and (3) errors or omissions in design. Kelly said the PUC plans to report this information quarterly and to provide advance notice when projects approach the 10% change-order threshold that requires commission approval.
Examples and numbers: The Standby Power project was reported at roughly 90% complete with about 9.7% in approved change orders (driven in part by new Bay Area Air Quality Management Board criteria and sole-source equipment additions). The Harry Tracy Water Treatment short-term improvements were about 70% complete with approximately 5.5% approved changes and roughly 9.6% of additional pending changes being evaluated; staff said some pending items are uncertainty-driven and may not be approved in full.
Risk-control steps: Staff described third-party constructability and bidability reviews, operation liaison positions that incorporate field feedback into design, and the use of a construction-management information system for near-real-time tracking. Contract-level contingency of about 10% was noted as standard industry practice, but commissioners and public commenters asked for project-specific contingency burn-rate fields to be added.
Follow-up: Staff agreed to consider adding a remaining-contingency indicator per project and to share the quarterly change-order report going forward; commissioners said the document provides needed transparency but cautioned against administrative delay that would hold up construction progress.
